Cyclic behaviour of CLT shear wall hold-down connections using mixed angle self-tapping screws
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper experimentally examines structural performance of novel cross laminated timber (CLT) hold-down connections consisting of customised steel brackets and self-tapping screws installed with mixed angles relative to loading. The installation of screws at mixed angles combines the high strength and stiffness of inclined screws with the high ductility of 90° screws creating a strong, stiff, and ductile connection. A total of 30 high capacity connection specimens comprising two timber species and five connection configurations are tested under monotonic and cyclic loading. The ratios between inclined screws and 90° screws are investigated in order to optimise the connection seismic performance. Connections consisting of 12× Ø12 mm inclined screws and 12 to 24× Ø12mm / 10 mm 90° screws were found to demonstrate high ultimate strength (470–593 kN), high initial stiffness (212–269 kN/mm) and high ductility (µ=10–20) under cyclic loading. Current strength calculation methods for the connection design are compared to the experimental results and are shown to provide conservative design predictions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".